Yesterday the United States Supreme Court overruled decades of legal precedent governing taxation for online purchases. The decision, South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc., No. 17-494 (June 21, 2018) changes the national standard on when an online business must collect and remit taxes under the states’ respective tax laws. Specifically, the Court ruled that an out-of-state … Continue Reading
Just last week, the United States Supreme Court provided much-needed clarification on the issue of who has standing to bring a false advertising claim under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1152(a). The decision, Lexmark Int’l v. Static control Components, US Supreme Court slip opinion (March 25, 2014), provides a national standard that remedies a three-way … Continue Reading
Tanya Forsheit recently appeared on Fox to discuss the Supreme Court's evaluation of GPS surveillance under the Fourth Amendment in US v. Jones. The case raises important issues regarding technology, aggregation of data, and privacy expectations with respect to location information.
… Continue Reading
What do pharmaceutical and data mining companies have in common with the video game industry? For starters, both recently prevailed in front of the U.S. Supreme Court when they challenged state legislation on First Amendment grounds. By a 6-3 vote on June 23, 2011, the Court struck down a Vermont statute that prohibited pharmacies and … Continue Reading
On March 1, 2011, the Supreme Court held in FCC v. AT&T Inc. that corporations do not enjoy “personal privacy.” The Court’s 8-0 decision reversed a Third Circuit Court of Appeals’ holding that corporations could prevent the release of certain information subject to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request on the basis of an … Continue Reading
The United States Supreme Court issued its decision today in City of Ontario, California v. Quon, ruling that a public employer's examination of an employee's personal text messages on a government-issued pager did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Justice Kennedy's opinion for the Court remarked that a review of messages on an employer-provided device would similarly be regarded as "reasonable and normal in the private-employer context."
… Continue Reading